Subdoubt IV: On pollution

IT MUST BE NOTED from St. Bonaventure in speculo animae, cap. 3. §. Circa tactum, et opusc. de puritate conscientiae, cap. 7. et 8. that pollution can occur in various ways and from various causes. For it can occur either in sleep or in waking, voluntarily, which is defined: Voluntary emission of seed.

THE NOCTURNAL, or in sleep, is sometimes wholly in sleep, and then it is not a sin, because it is not voluntary. So the Saintly Doctor in the places adduced, St. Thomas art. 5. Cajetan. ibi, Navar. cap. 16. Tolet. lib. 5. summae, cap. 13. Azor. tom. 3. cap. 24. quaestio 1. Fagundez in 6. praecept. lib. 6. cap. 9. num. 17. But this is understood provided it was not procured beforehand in waking, or you consent in the same waking.

SOMETIMES it is partly in sleep, partly in waking, as if the movement of the flesh and the decision of seed happen in sleep: but the emission of seed in waking, in which you have full power of restraining, or half-full.

If the movement and decision happen in dreams, and the emission in half-waking, there is no sin.

THE QUESTION, however, is whether, if the emission happens in full waking, it is culpable.

THE FIRST opinion is that it is mortal not to repress it. So Tolet. lib. 5. cap. 13.

THE SECOND opinion is that there is no sin, but that it is enough not to take pleasure in it. So Sà verb. Luxuria, Filliucius tom. 1. tract. 30. in 6. praecep. cap. 8. Navar. sum. cap. 16. Graff. lib. 2. decis. cap. 81. num. 14. Azor tom. 3. cap. 24. Cordub. quaest. 23. Soto in 4. dist. 12. quaest. 1. art. 2. Sanchez lib. 9. de matrim. disp. 17. Fagundez in 6. praecep. lib. 6. cap. 9. with St. Bonaventure in the places cited.

MY REASON is, because the seed once decided is naturally and necessarily carried outside. For whether seed is generated in the vessels of the testicles, as the learned Vesalius and Bartolinus teach, which I assert — for it has often been observed in cadavers, as Dodoneus writes observ. 39. Hofmannus de gener. cap. 18. Carpus Riolanus in Bartolinus lib. 1. de infirmo ventre, cap. 22. — or whether it is not generated in them, as Fallopius, Cabrolius, Posthius, Casp. Hofmannus, Caesar Cremoninus, Adr. Spigelius, Regius and others in Bartolinus will; certainly there are vessels of Seed, beginning from the testicles, ending at the root of the penis, by which they carry it, and with force ejaculate the seed, prepared in the testicles, or elaborated above in the spermatic vessels. Wherefore indeed it can restrain it for a time, but yet the seed will without doubt come forth at last.

BUT it CAN, even occurring in sleep, be culpable in its cause. First in the desire for pleasure, second in the procuration, third in not removing the foreseen cause.

IT IS ASKED whether it is lawful to wish for pollution in sleep for health, or for a moderation of lust.

Valentia disput. 9. quaest. 3. puncto 3. Sot. 4. dist. 12. quaest. 1. art. 7. Lopez part. 1. cap. 74. Syluius 2. 2. quaest. 154. art. 5. DENY it; otherwise it would be lawful to procure it.

THEY GRANT that to wish for it, although not to procure it, is lawful: for thus it is lawful to wish for the death of a tyrant king, but God forbid procuring it: Sayrus lib. 8. cap. 5. Navar. sum. cap. 16. Angelus, and Sylvester V. Pollu. Sa V. Luxur. Toletus lib. 5. cap. 13. D. Anton. 2. part. tit. 6. cap. 6. Vasquez 1. 2. disp. 115. cap. 3. Sanchez sum. cap. 2. Filliucius tom. 2. tract. 30. cap. 8. num. 144. Fagundez cap. 9. num. 31. Bassaeus V. Luxur. num. 14. with St. Bonaventure in the places cited.

FOR THAT REASON it is lawful to rejoice, as they teach: Diana part. 3. tract. 5. misc. Resol. 21. et 87. Sanchez select. disp. 21. num. 35. Tannet. prima secunda, disp. 4. quaest. 8. num. 145. Fernand. part. 4. cap. 2. §. 4. Cruz part. 1. praecep. 6. art. 8. dub. 10.

TO PROCURE, however, is always lethal, as they teach with St. Bonaventure, in Sanchez lib. 9. de matrim. disp. 17. num. 16. Fagundez num. 31. who brings forward many reasons of disparity, not very strong. For if it is lawful to cut off a member for life; why not sperm, which is almost an excrement? Because, you say, the members are destined first for the conservation of the individual, therefore it is lawful to expose them for life; but not the seed, which is ordered to the propagation of the species — this, I say, is weak, even though it is commonly brought forward, because also the testicles are ordered to the species, and nearer still the very embryo inanimate, and yet it is lawful to tear these away for the health of the individual.

EXCELLENT is the reason of St. Bonaventure in Diaeta, tit. 1. cap. ult. which Sanchez uses de Matrim. in the place cited: for the emission of seed by excessive pleasure overwhelms reason, and reduces the will to a deplorable servitude. Wherefore nature granted it only for generation; but the mutilation of members, compensated by pain, man does not pursue. Fagundez brings the same reason num. 33. with Tostatus quaest. 184. in cap. 5. Matth. on these words: It is expedient for you that you lose one of your members rather than that your whole body be cast into hell, which passage the Saintly Doctor turns to this purpose, loc. cit. St. Bonaventure indicates this reason also in 4. d. 31. art. 2. quaest. 3.

As regards foreseen pollution occurring in dreams.

It is the opinion of many that you are bound under pain of mortal sin to avoid the causes from which you know pollution will come, or which you know morally, for example eating such foods, lying in such a position, provided however you are not morally certain, that it is only venial. So Tolet. lib. 5. cap. 13. Sylvest. verb. pollutio, Less. tom. 1. lib. 4. cap. 3. d. 14. Sotus 4. dist. 12. quaest. 1. art. 7. Fagundez in 6. praec. lib. 6. cap. 9. num. 34. They add the condition for mortal sin, if it can easily be avoided, for example by taking other foods, etc.

In truth Diana p. p. Tract. de circumstan. aggrav. resol. 65. judges that foreseen pollution, but not intended, and not only in ordinary foods and eating, but in mortally lethal ones, for example drunkenness, is not mortal. He adduces Villalob. tom. 2. tract. 40. d. 16. Vasq. prima 2. d. 115. cap. 3. Sanchez de matrim. tom. 3. l. 9. d. 45. num. 17. Granado 3. part. 2. controv. 6. tract. 4. d. 6. Sancium fol. d. 21. num. 15. et d. 23. num. 29. who further adds that no cause is given efficacious of itself for polluting in dreams, whether the sights or touches be foul; for if they do not cause it while they are present, much less when absent. Therefore no cause is to be confessed unless one be given by the intention of willing that pollution; but then only the intention is to be confessed, not the pollution. Bassaeus praises this doctrine V. Luxur. num. 15. although he adds, from Sanchez lib. 9. d. 45. num. 30. that the pollution itself is also to be confessed. He adduces also Vasquez prima 2. d. 125.

This doctrine of Sancius stinks to me, for it too much conflicts with the practice and with confessions received from confessants of secular priests, whom I have consulted: why, however, those objects materially absent act more in dreams is, because wherever they are moved intentionally, those species agitated in the quiet of the other senses are stronger by a power there united, and in a manner reflected.

I will say, however, with Diana, that foreseen pollution, but not intended, from actions sinful only venially in the genus of luxury, is not mortal. He alleges Suarez, Henriquez, Sanchez, Villalob. Less. and others, whom Tanner. adduces 2. part. d. 4. quaest. 8. dub. 6. num. 123. whose opinion he judges probable in num. 126.

From these Sancius also says, num. 12. that one is not bound otherwise to lie in bed, even if one can conveniently do otherwise: and num. 18. that one is not bound to leave the bed, even if one feels delectation with an alteration of the private parts. Diana reports him p. p. Tract. 16. resol. ult.

Many say it is lawful to procure the expulsion of corrupt seed by friction, even if by accident the emission of true seed follows. So Sanchez, and Villalobus. But here in the fifth edition he expunged this; the latter retracted it, because it is truly a false opinion, although Bonacina follows it de matrim. quaest. 4. p. 10. num. 11.

It will indeed be lawful for a Surgeon to handle the private parts of a sick man in need of turning, for the sake of the cure, with the danger of pollution. So Vasquez prima 2. Tom. 1. d. 115. num. 9. Less. lib. 4. cap. 3. d. 14. Ioan. de la Cruz in direct. praec. 6. d. 9. and others in Diana.

So neither is a runner forced to go on foot, even if he has experienced that he suffers pollution by riding. So many, with whom Diana concurs.

Much less will it be a sin not to abandon grave duties from which pollution follows, as confessions, studies, schools. Fagundez admits this also num. 35. adducing others.

There is also pollution procured, occurring in waking, which is called softness, and it is a grave offence, as is had in 1 Cor. 6. Therefore of these it is said: The soft shall not possess the kingdom of God.

For it is against the special order of nature, as St. Bonaventure notes in the place adduced above.

Therefore Physicians sin most gravely who persuade this to the sick, or provoke it with medicines, as Fagundez notes; nor are those excused from mortal sin who obey them. So they teach Tolet. lib. 5. cap. 13. Lessius lib. 4. cap. 3. d. 14. num. 94. and others in Fagundez. It can however be provoked per se, or with another, which are to be expressed in confession, as St. Bonaventure teaches, Speculo, cap. 3. and others.

To procure a great movement of the genital spirits is lethal; it is truly known to be great, if it gravely disturbs reason, as Bassaeus says with Sanch. num. 19. He says otherwise where a slight distillation and movement of the spirits is procured by reason of the patency of the matter ceasing, with the danger of pollution, and he adduces Sanch. de matr. and Bonacina: But I did not admit the patency of the matter, quaest. 3. disp. 1.